Introduction: We want to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of BI-RADS ultrasound, as well as PPV and NPV of BI-RADS ultrasound lexicon. Methods: A total of 517 ultrasound-guided breast biopsy cases were performed within three years. A total of 324 cases remained after 193 cases were excluded from this study. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV of overall BI-RADS and PPV for each BI-RADS categories were calculated from the data when compared with histopathological examination (HPE) finding. One observer evaluated four criteria of BI-RADS ultrasound lexicon; margin, echogenicity, posterior artefact and internal echo from static sonographic images to determine the PPV and NPV of sonographic BI-RADS lexicon based on HPE correlation. Results: There were 236 (72.8%) benign and 88 (27.1%) malignant lesions. The overall BI-RADS has a sensitivity of 93.18%, specificity of 66.95%, accuracy of 74.07% with PPV and NPV of 51.25% and 96.34% respectively. The PPV of each BI-RADS categories were; BI-RADS 2 (9.09%), BI-RADS 3 (3.27%), BI-RADS 4 (39.02%) and BI-RADS 5 (91.89%). The highest predictive value for malignancy was irregular margin (52.3%) and for benign was well-defined margin (89.7%). Criteria for margin and posterior artefact had a significant association with HPE (p<0.0001) in differentiating between malignant and benign breast lesions in breast ultrasound. Conclusion: Overlapping benign and malignant sonographic breast lesion descriptors tend to influence radiologist’s decision to overcall final BI-RADS categories. The margin and posterior artefact are the important criteria in BI-RADS lexicon in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesion.

Introduction: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is among the common death-causing cancers worldwide. This liver malignancy is primarily diagnosed using radiological imaging techniques. Most of the patients in Malaysia present late and were diagnosed at an intermediate or advanced stage of Barcelona Clinic of Liver Cancer (BCLC). This causes a limitation on the treatment options for the patients. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective crosssectional study of HCC cases within a five-year period in our center with data collected from Hospital Canselor Tunku Mukhriz (HCTM). This study examines the HCC risk factors, the pattern of diagnosis, treatment options and overall survival. Results: The findings from this study showed that viral hepatitis was the highest risk factor in which most of the patients were elderly males who presented with abdominal distension. In addition, given the high prevalence of metabolic diseases Malaysia, it is predicted that the number of non-alcoholic steatohepatosis (NASH)-related HCC cases might increase. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) proved to have no significant role in the detection of the disease. The number of patients detected at early BCLC was minimal, resulting in limited options of treatment. Overall survival of our HCC patients was poor at 17 months. Conclusion: We conclude that HCC patients in HCTM mostly presented at late stage to hospital, hence limiting the treatment options and resulted in poor survival rate. Disease awareness should be implemented at primary care level to detect HCC at its early stage. Subsequently, a multidisciplinary hospital team is required to manage the disease at its different stages of presentation.